The Alliance for Sustainable Coloradohttp://www.sustainablecolorado.org
Transforming Sustainability from Vision to RealityWed, 29 Jul 2015 01:18:57 +0000en-UShourly1Hello world!http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/hello-world/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/hello-world/#commentsWed, 27 Nov 2013 23:03:17 +0000http://www.testsite.thealliancecenter.org/?p=1Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!
]]>http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/hello-world/feed/0Reflections from the 2013 Natural Gas Symposiumhttp://www.sustainablecolorado.org/reflections-from-the-2013-natural-gas-symposium/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/reflections-from-the-2013-natural-gas-symposium/#commentsTue, 12 Nov 2013 17:42:49 +0000http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/?p=17383To [frack], or not to [frack]—that is the question: Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune Or to take arms against a sea of troubles And by opposing end them. Hamlet’s soliloquy came to life at the 2013 Natural Gas Symposium in Fort Collins in October, when leaders, students, elected officials, industry experts and citizens gathered to learn and discuss the theme Doing Energy Right. The Symposium, organized by Colorado State University including the Center for the New Energy Economy and School of Global Environmental Sustainability, presented the diverse social, economic, and environmental aspects of the natural gas industry; videos from the conference are available online. Key conversations in water quantity, air quality, climate, fracking and public policy were addressed and are discussed in more detail below.

Water Quantity

Concerned citizens and environmentalists argue natural gas extraction uses precious water resources, which may be irresponsible given our unpredictable snow pack, water supply, and drought conditions. Industry points out that less than .1% of water consumption in Colorado is attributed to oil and gas (the majority goes to agriculture); and reuse and recycling of waste water in extraction operations is increasing and becoming a best practice to save water and costs.

Air Quality

All stakeholders acknowledged that air quality impacts of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Nitrous Oxides (NOx) in extraction operations need to be studied further. In addition, the need for reducing fugitive emissions to avoid excess methane leaching into the atmosphere at extraction sites is imperative—Governor Hickenlooper has set a goal of 0 fugitive emissions in Colorado. CSU is currently conducting two studies in the Northern Front Range and Garfield County on air pollution from oil and gas operations, but the studies will not be complete for another few years. Additional studies are also needed on the implications of these emissions on public health—from cancer, to asthma, to other non-cancer ailments.

Climate

On one hand, natural gas (methane) releases less carbon dioxide into atmosphere than coal when it is burned, which could make it a viable transition fuel as the EPA develops is Carbon Pollution Standards. On the other hand, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group I just released the report Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis and confirms that methane is 75x more potent than carbon dioxide, which is much more potent than previously anticipated, and therefore the need to avoid fugitive emissions in any natural gas operation is paramount in strategies to reduce carbon emissions. It was noted that renewables like solar and wind still release less greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than natural gas. Given these variables, actors at the symposium had diverse opinions on whether natural gas should function as a transition or destination fuel in addressing climate change.

Fracking: Inquiries into Community & Public Policy

On one side concerned citizens show 20 second videos of sink water lighting on fire as a result of fracking disasters and present valid concerns about health and the environment; while on the other side a highly technical industry struggles to communicate its science and operations to the public and acknowledges that 97% of operations run smoothly. Given these differences, many speakers at the symposium promoted dialogue and the willingness to compromise for all stakeholders in natural gas operations. Despite these ideologies of dialogue, many communities in Colorado have brought the fracking issue to the ballot. In early November, voters in Boulder, Lafayette, and Fort Collins passed bans or moratoriums on fracking, while a similar initative in Broomfield lost by as little as 13 votes. These ballots will now be caught up in litigation against the State of Colorado—since there is mixed concern for cities and the State, do either have the legal right to ban fracking? As the symposium came to an end, the reality rang that natural gas is a part of our economy for the time being, and it is unclear how this Shakesperean play will end. However, it is clear that Colorado Citizens will continue to debate what ‘tis nobler in the mind about natural gas for decades to come.

]]>http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/reflections-from-the-2013-natural-gas-symposium/feed/1Blue Collar Robots Steal Green Jobshttp://www.sustainablecolorado.org/blue-collar-robots-steal-green-jobs/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/blue-collar-robots-steal-green-jobs/#commentsWed, 16 Oct 2013 18:05:37 +0000http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/?p=17350There’s good news and bad news these days for the solar energy industry and its workers. The good news: Some enterprising companies are planning to reduce the cost of solar power by using robots to install and clean solar panels at large solar farms. The bad news: The humans who do those things today are likely to lose their jobs.

As the New York Times reports it, the solar industry may soon become the latest sector of the economy in which people lose jobs to 3-CPO and R2-D2 clones. The reason: Solar companies need to cut their production costs to compete with dirt-cheap natural gas. The panels themselves are about as inexpensive as they’re going to get. The price of solar panels has dropped 70% since 1980, but the cost of building and installing them has gone up. That means the fastest way to cut costs is to cut people.

Van Jones, the green jobs czar in the White House at the start of the Obama Administration and still the nation’s most articulate champion for green jobs, sees a different future — an economy where at-risk youth become upwardly mobile youth, insulating homes, installing solar panels and staying gainfully employed in jobs that can’t be exported to China.

That future has been materializing. Earlier this year, The Solar Foundation reported there were nearly 120,000 workers in the solar sector, with solar jobs growing faster than jobs in almost any other industry. Texas has more solar energy workers than ranchers, the Foundation said, and America has more solar workers than coal miners. Nearly half of these workers are solar panel installers – a job that pays about $18 an hour, slightly higher than the national median wage.

But while they can’t be exported to China, solar jobs can be transferred to robots. The result is called “technological unemployment” and it’s one of the reasons we’re having a jobless economic recovery.

Marshall Brain, the author of Robotic Nation, estimates there will be 1.2 million industrial robots worldwide this year – one for every 5,000 people. Robots don’t get tired or sick, and they rarely complain. They don’t require Obamacare or company pensions. They don’t take long lunches.

NBCNEWS.com says the jobs most likely to be taken over by robots in the years ahead include not only solar workers, but also pharmacists, lawyers, astronauts, soldiers, store clerks, babysitters, sports reporters, rescuers and people who drive cars.

This raises big questions about the price of progress. It also raises questions about the price of natural gas. The competition between solar power and natural gas should be less about cutting the cost of solar energy and more about raising the price of gas. The price we pay for natural gas – and for coal and oil, for that matter – doesn’t come close to reflecting its true costs. Consider:

• Natural gas is a carbon fuel that contributes to global warming. Solar energy is not.
• Natural gas comes with a fuel cost. Solar energy does not.
• Natural gas production raises concerns about the impact of fracking on people and communities. Solar energy does not.
• Natural gas is delivered through about 300,000 miles of occasionally leaky pipelines in the United States today, with more planned to keep up with production. Solar power comes to us in 8 minutes and 20 seconds from 93 million miles away without wires or pipes.
• Gas is a finite fuel whose supply will run out sooner or later, either because we’ve used it all or because climate change dictates that we can’t. Solar power comes from a source that will be around another 5 billion years.

One would think that the solar industry could compete very well with the oil and gas industry, even without robots. But we tolerate an energy marketplace skewed to the advantage of fossil fuels, rigged to ignore the real costs of energy, and fixated on first costs rather than life-cycle costs.

A little bit of attention from Congress could fix things so that solar energy and natural gas could compete in a fair fight and those blue-collar workers could keep their green jobs. A price on carbon would be a good start. But the current Congress is focused on more important things, like fiscal brinksmanship to impress the Tea Party.

Which is why of all the jobs that robots could take over from humans, Congress would be a much better place to start.

]]>http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/blue-collar-robots-steal-green-jobs/feed/1Ignoring Paul Reverehttp://www.sustainablecolorado.org/ignoring-paul-revere/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/ignoring-paul-revere/#commentsMon, 30 Sep 2013 17:29:23 +0000http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/?p=17108The latest findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) tell us what we’ve been told several times before, except with a greater degree of certainty. Climate change is real and we had better stop burning carbon soon if we want to avoid a future in which we suffer in biblical proportions.

The IPCC is like a doctor who gives us a checkup every few years. Time after time, the diagnosis is the same except more certain and the prognosis is the same except more urgent. We are the patients who either refuse to believe it, or believe it and refuse to stop the behavior that makes us sick. The majority of us, it seems, would rather listen to beer commercials than the news because the news is getting pretty bad.

The latest report from this largest of all scientific enterprises is said to be conservative in its findings. Yet, its conclusions are not reassuring. “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal,” the scientists report, “and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia.” To be more specific:

• “The atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, and nitrous oxide have increased to levels unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years.”

• “Human influence on the climate system is clear… Human influence has been detected in warming of the atmosphere and the ocean, in changes in the global water cycle, in reductions in snow and ice, in global mean sea level rise, and in changes in some climate extremes… It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”

• “Continued emissions of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and changes in all components of the climate system. Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.”

Which means substantial and sustained reductions in our use of fossil fuels.

What will the impacts be? The IPCC concludes that the “likely” changes in this early part of the 21st century will be more hot days and nights, more heavy rains like those that Colorado just experienced, and rising sea levels that make coastal storms more destructive.

Yet if the recent past is an indication of the future, deniers will fixate on the word “likely”, because “likely” in the language of the layman doesn’t mean “certain”. Scientists don’t speak in the language of certainty: to them, 95% certainty means “you can take it to the bank”.

The IPCC says we must wean ourselves from fossil fuels in the next 30-40 years if we want to avoid the worst. To the denier, it means that even if climate change were real, we don’t have to worry about for a while. But what the science really tells us is that every year we continue consuming oil, coal and natural gas is a year of damage we can’t take back – a year in which we’ve locked ourselves and our children into a future in which today’s “biblical” weather disasters become more and more common.

To get our heads around this, a few more metaphors come to mind:

• We are the alcoholic who takes comfort in the fact that his liver disease has not yet reached end-state, so he can keep drinking awhile longer.

• We are the CEOs of our own lives, thinking about the next quarter or the next election, but not about the future that we are shaping now and that, in the scheme of things, is right around the corner.

• Our future is a tropical storm that’s heading this way fast, already messing with our weather while it builds into a hurricane that is likely to be the most destructive we’ve ever known.

• The experts of the IPCC, and other scientists, too, have been our Paul Revere. We are the good citizens who decide every time he rides through town that Paul is an alarmist; we can roll over and go back to sleep.

If a word to the wise is sufficient, it is increasingly obvious that we, as a society, are not very wise. Instead, we seem to be the “hollow men” that T.S. Eliot described nearly 90 years ago, when he wrote (parenthetical addition mine):This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends (at least as we have known it) Not with bang, but a whimper

Sustainable renovation of the Alliance Center will result in new hub for sustainability and model for 21st century workspace design

Denver, CO (September 26, 2013) – Today, the Alliance for Sustainable Colorado officially kicked off the transformation of The Alliance Center, the multi-tenant nonprofit center in Lower Downtown Denver owned and operated by the organization. This full, green renovation of the Alliance Center, which will continue to provide low-market rent to multiple nonprofit organizations upon completion of the project, will transform the building to become a hub of sustainability in the state of Colorado. In addition, the transformation will establish the Alliance Center as a community asset for those working on sustainability, as well as a demonstration model for green building and 21st century workspace design.

Increasing productivity is another vital part of the transformation project, due largely to the fact that much of the building stock in the U.S. is under-utilized and under-productive. The Alliance Center will explore ways to move the needle forward through open space design, furniture solutions and new leasing models such as hot-desking. Proposed green guidelines for occupants are another way of setting a sustainability standard for commercial office space, offering a powerful way to encourage sustainable behavior among tenants. These guidelines will include stipulations such as tenants purchasing only Energy Star appliances and participating in building-wide recycling and composting programs.

As stated by John Powers, Founder and Board Chair of the Alliance for Sustainable Colorado,

“We cannot afford to be satisfied with improvements that were implemented decades ago. Buildings consume over half of the energy we use, and contribute more than 40 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions. Complacency offers only a false sense of achievement. The transformation of the Alliance Center will push the limits of our potential and hopefully set a standard for the commercial building industry.”

Last renovated nearly a decade ago, the Alliance Center is the first historic building in the world to have received two LEED certifications (Existing Buildings Gold and Commercial Interiors Silver). This transformation project will implement newly developed sustainable building practices and technologies reflective of the advancements in the sustainability industry.

“In Denver, sustainability is a way of life and is one of my administration’s top priorities,” said Denver Mayor Michael B. Hancock. “The Alliance Center has been one of our city’s greatest models of how to grow smart and live sustainably. Their renovation is just another example of their deep commitment towards being resourceful today so that we can all thrive tomorrow.”

The transformation of the Alliance Center is projected to be complete within the first quarter of 2014. As a result of the tenant-focused property management model instituted by the Alliance Center, the retention rate of current Alliance Center tenants who will be maintaining space post-transformation is well above 80%.

For more information about the Alliance Center and the Alliance for Sustainable Colorado, visit www.sustainablecolorado.org.

###

About Alliance for Sustainable Colorado

The Alliance for Sustainable Colorado (the Alliance) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to engaging nonprofit, business, government and education leaders in collaboration to overcome complex sustainability challenges with 360-degree solutions. The Alliance acts as a hub to facilitate change and improve decision making to move the state of Colorado toward a truly sustainable future. Envisioning a Colorado where leaders across the state work together to make decisions that improve quality of life by simultaneously promoting economic vitality, healthy vibrant communities, and environmental integrity for current and future generations, the Alliance offers programs, tools and demonstration models to meet this vision. For more information, visit www.sustainablecolorado.org.

]]>http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/alliance-for-sustainable-colorado-and-mayor-michael-b-hancock-kick-off-the-alliance-center-transformation/feed/0A War on Coal?http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/a-war-on-coal/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/a-war-on-coal/#commentsMon, 23 Sep 2013 16:02:11 +0000http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/?p=17085Is President Obama waging a war on coal? That’s the allegation from the coal industry and its champions in Congress as the Administration cracks down on carbon pollution.

The “war on coal” theme came up again last week when the Environmental Protection Agency issued a draft rule to limit carbon emissions from power plants. But who’s warring whom? Let’s think about this.

The evolution of the U.S. economy – of any robust economy, in fact – is a story of invention and obsolescence. New technology comes along; old technology fades away. The people who depend on the old technology don’t like it. Until they adjust, they are victims of progress.

So it is with coal. The coal industry, including the black-faced, black-lunged miners who risk their lives every day to keep our lights on, deserves enormous credit for where we are today: one of the world’s most prosperous people.

But two new realities have emerged that are redefining progress: Coal is the dirtiest of the fuels responsible for global climate change, and we are finding much better ways to keep the lights on. The idea that the Obama Administration is waging a war against coal is like accusing Henry Ford of making war against buggy whips, or Apple of warring against conventional phones and typewriters. EPA’s new rules aren’t designed to kill the coal industry; they are a challenge for the industry to get clean or get gone.

If the government has finally decided we can’t wait for market forces to do the job, it’s because the industry has become a threat to our health and our future. Buggy whips didn’t inflict children with asthma, and telephones didn’t alter the Earth’s climate. We have used so much coal that its pollution is damaging the atmosphere and inflicting hurt on people around the world, including those who’ve never used the stuff. Coal has become too much of a good thing. To use the industry’s war analogy, it has become a weapon of mass destruction, a type of chemical warfare against our children and us. Its destructive force is irreversible as well as global. We can be sure that our President gets no pleasure from forcing the industry to face these harsh new realities. It’s his job, by law and on behalf of us all.

This is little comfort to the miners and the truckers and the railroad workers who dig coal out of the ground and bring it to market. They see themselves as collateral damage and, in fact, they are. They will remain collateral damage until Congress and the industry’s leaders stop fighting progress and focus on a just and compassionate transition to cleaner fuels. That transition opens new opportunities for us all, including the families and communities whose economies are built on a resource that now must be retired.

A new generation of energy resources is moving into place to keep the lights on. Or, more accurately, it is an ancient family of resources that we forgot how to use and now must reemploy. Sunlight, wind, water, geothermal energy, bioenergy and other clean and sustainable resources are our ubiquitous technically recoverable reserves. Renewables are ready.

It is not only the coal industry that must adjust. It means big changes for other industries, too, including our traditional electric utilities. Some of them also believe they are in a death spiral rather than on the threshold of opportunity. The change we must make – and that in fact already has begun — runs deep. Our dependence on carbon energy has been legislated and capitalized into the fabric our economy, and that makes the change harder and more painful.

But it is a necessary transition and America has a moral obligation to lead it, unless we are willing to be the generation of cowards that leaves our children with lives of suffering and instability. That’s a legacy that President Obama and so many of the rest find cannot accept. The coal miners in Appalachia probably would not want to leave that legacy either, if we honored the role they have played in our prosperity and they had a suitable alternative for taking care of their families.

As sure as the sun rises every morning, renewables are the clean and inexhaustible fuels of the 21st century economy. All that stands in the way are the soldiers of the status quo who are warring against the next big and necessary step in our progress and in the lives of those people around the world – one of every five of us — who live in energy poverty with no lights to keep on.

The Obama Administration has not declared a war on coal. The leaders of the coal industry and their message machine are waging a war against the future we want. The Obama Administration, on behalf of us all, is finally fighting back.

]]>http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/a-war-on-coal/feed/2EnergySagehttp://www.sustainablecolorado.org/org/energysage/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/org/energysage/#commentsFri, 20 Sep 2013 16:39:29 +0000http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/?post_type=org&p=17077EnergySage is a company that helps get the best deal on Solar PV for homes, businesses or non-profits. The EnergySage Marketplace allows customers to quickly get quotes for Solar from multiple highly qualified and vetted installers. These quotes include the full range of financing options, from zero down leases to solar loans, and anything in between. EnergySage removes presents these quotes in a clear, table format with cash flow charts, installer reviews, real life case studies and Advisor assistance to help make this an easy decision. All at no cost! The development of the EnergySage Marketplace was funded by the Department of Energy through the SunShot program. EnergySage is happy to create customized solar programs, leveraging the Marketplace, for any organization interested in promoting solar to it members.
]]>http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/org/energysage/feed/0Are Women Leading the Charge Toward More Sustainable Investing?http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/are-women-leading-the-charge-toward-more-sustainable-investing/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/are-women-leading-the-charge-toward-more-sustainable-investing/#commentsThu, 19 Sep 2013 21:20:12 +0000http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/?p=17075Guest blog post by Betsy Markus. The information and opinions expressed in this guest blog do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Alliance for Sustainable Colorado.

Women are a significant economic force in the United States, currently controlling an estimated 60% of wealth, and the number of wealthy women is growing twice as fast as the number of wealthy men. On a global basis, women stand to inherit 70% of the $41 trillion in inter-generational wealth transfer expected over the next 40 years.

Historically, investable wealth in the U.S. was largely in the hands and minds of men. The investment industry is dominated by men, investment professional ranks are predominantly populated by men, and investment strategies are designed for men. We all know that men and women think and behave differently. What will be the effect of women taking an increasingly bigger role in investment decision making?

Women tend to view money as a way to enable themselves and their families to live their dreams—it’s a means to avoid becoming a burden to other family members, achieve security, independence, and a better life for their children. Men, on the other hand, view money as a means to an end—a way to buy a second home or pay for children’s education. The tangible things that wealth purchases may end up being the same by women and men; however, the mindset about getting there is very different.

Joseph Keefe summarized the effect that these different mindsets have on investing behavior: “Something’s happening here. Women, it seems, are more inclined to want their investments aligned with their values while men are more likely to compartmentalize—investments in one compartment, moral and political values in another. Whereas men tend to view money as ethically neutral, women generally have stronger feelings about the social and environmental impacts of money.”

Women are interested in long-term sustainability, both as investors and as decision makers. A study published last year shows that women retail investors are more interested than their male counterparts in corporate social responsibility, from all angles.

Increasing evidence also highlights the fact that women are seeking out investments that embed environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria in their investment processes. The U.S. Trust 2013 Insights on Wealth and Worth survey found that 65% of female investors believe it is important to consider the impact of investment decisions on society and the environment, versus 42% of male investors.

Women may very well be leading the charge to improve long-term investment decision making, with ESG factors increasingly integrated into professional investment management processes. As of April 2013, The UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UN PRI) had 1,200 global investment management signatories pledging to include ESG considerations in investment decisions, up from 100 signatories in April 2006. One out of every nine dollars under professional management in the U.S. is currently involved in sustainable, responsible, impact (SRI) investing in one way or another, and this value is increasing rapidly each year.

An increasing portion of wealth is transferring into the hands of women who want their investments aligned with their personal values. They know that their money has impact in the world, and they are choosing to pay attention to that impact. They may very well lead our society into the next stage of investing maturity.

How does the albatross feels about Denver’s proposed disposable bag fee?

According to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, in the middle of the North Pacific Ocean, on a tiny island 1,000 miles from the nearest big city, many Laysan albatross chicks die each year because their bellies are full of bottle caps, toothbrushes and other plastic. One study found that 97.5% of chicks had plastic in their stomachs.

Single use plastic bags have significant environmental impacts — during their manufacture AND disposal. Some of the plastic ingested by marine life is “nurdles”: a pre-production microplastic pellet about the size of a pea used to make plastic bags. Other plastic contaminants, which harm wildlife, are remnants of used plastic bags, which never biodegrade.

How do you feel about Denver’s bag fee? Comment on this blog to express your opinion.

Then, contact Denver’s elected officials

Contact City Council via email: dencc@denvergov.org

Contact the Mayor’s office via email: Milehighmayor@denvergov.org

Attend the City Council Meeting on December 9

· When: Monday, December 9, 2013 – 5:30PM

· Where: 1437 Bannock St. 4th Floor, City Council Chambers

· Additional questions about the hearing can be directed to City Council Legislative Services at 720.337.2000 or dencc@denvergov.org.

Why A Fee?

· Approximately 130 million single-use shopping bags are consumed in Denver annually at grocery and convenience stores alone

Check out my previous blog on the bag fee.

]]>http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/a-5-cent-disposable-bag-fee-is-a-small-price-to-pay/feed/0American Renewable Energy Day Conference: recaphttp://www.sustainablecolorado.org/american-renewable-energy-day-conference-recap/
http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/american-renewable-energy-day-conference-recap/#commentsThu, 29 Aug 2013 15:45:31 +0000http://www.sustainablecolorado.org/?p=17009In August, energy leaders from across the United States met in Aspen for the 10th Annual AREDAY (American Renewable Energy Day). The theme of the summit was Advancing Clean Energy: Transition to a Sustainable Global Economy.

The majority of speakers and panels at AREDAY emphasized the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a global scale. Lester Brown, the Alliance’s 2010 Hero of Sustainability, advocated for cutting carbon emissions 80% by 2025—which is much more rigorous than the majority of current climate action plans which call for 80% reductions by 2050.

Despite these rigorous reduction challenges, there was a general optimism about the President’s Climate Action Plan. Larry Schweiger of the National Wildlife Federation and Gene Karpinski of the League of Conservation Voters noted the climate plan is by far the most comprehensive one either had ever seen. They also empowered the community to come together to make sure the plan becomes a reality, encouraged congress to pass climate change legislation, and urged individuals to take the President’s advice and make climate change a prerequisite for their votes.

An irony rang through the room during Reverend Jesse Jackson’s keynote sermon on Sunday, during which he advocated for engaging with the poor, all people, and all countries for renewable energy. He likened the information and attendees at the conference in Aspen to a blood clot that needs to be dispersed and disseminated through the entire body for true health. He emphasized that the poor will benefit from that dissemination and investment in renewables, mass transportation, and other environmental programs.

When it came to local development issues, Governor Bill Ritter facilitated a panel on natural gas that posed more questions than answers. The Colorado Supreme Court will soon decide if municipalities have the right to ban fracking; and Colorado voters may decide on the 2014 ballot whether there should be a statewide ban on fracking, though many panelists felt the full ban is a bit premature.

AREDAY attendees were encouraged to submit their top three ideas for next steps to the conference organizers for dissemination, and ideas from carbon taxes to education and advocacy permeated the audience. While an exact path forward to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions remained unsolved as the conference came to an end, AREDAY once again successfully provided relevant and recent information on climate change and the reality and the need for fearlessness for the road to renewables.